[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by nomadking

They DID mention how it was meant to be used on the RIBA website and other places. How else do you think I knew about it?
Any architects would just see it on a list of materials and it was claimed to be the only one suitable for high rise buildings.
It was(probably still is) used all over the place in lower-rise buildings, including houses. The height limit for that type of product was based upon the reach of Fire and Rescue ladders. In the US, that limit was different.
Too much focus on the cladding, when it even if it had been made of solidified napalm, it wouldn't have gone up like that. It was too thin, compared to the 10cm and 15cm thick insulation. The identified risk of burning cladding, was of dripping downwards, not going upwards.
The open purge panels(to let large amounts of air in or out) gave the internal fire access to the exterior insulation.
Any mention of the level of illegal sub-letting and the excess of electrical appliances(fridge/freezers, cookers etc)? The picture of the flat which was the source of the fire, had an excess of electrical appliances.

Was the source of the fire an electrical appliance ?